Norman T. Gadomski, Jr. v. Joseph H. Tavares, Chief of Police for the City of East Providence
113 A.3d 387
R.I.2015Background
- Gadomski, an East Providence resident, applied in early 2012 for a Rhode Island license to carry a concealed weapon; he disclosed two decades-old misdemeanor arrests that were dismissed.
- He attended an unrecorded interview with Chief Tavares; subsequent written submissions included out-of-state permits and firearms-education credentials.
- Tavares delayed responding; after letters and a mandamus petition, the city formally denied the application in January 2013, citing lack of good/proper reason and past criminal behavior.
- Gadomski challenged the denial via the Superior Court (APA review and mandamus); Superior Court dismissed for lack of jurisdiction based on Mosby precedent.
- Gadomski petitioned the Rhode Island Supreme Court for certiorari to review suitability and adequacy of the denial; the Supreme Court granted relief and quashed the denial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 11-47-11 denial is reviewable by certiorari | Gadomski: Denial of suitability under § 11-47-11 is reviewable on certiorari | Tavares: Local discretion governs; Superior Court lacked jurisdiction | Court: Denial under § 11-47-11 is reviewable on certiorari (Mosby governs) |
| Whether the denial gave adequate factual findings and rationale | Gadomski: Denial lacked factual findings and was conclusory; must state evidence and reasons | Tavares: Denial letter stated reasons (no good/proper reason; prior arrests) sufficiently | Court: Denial letter was conclusory and insufficient; required factual findings were missing |
| Whether East Providence applied correct statutory standard | Gadomski: Local authority applied wrong standard conflating § 11-47-11 with § 11-47-18 | Tavares: Relied on departmental policy blending factors | Court: Respondent used incorrect standard (improperly imported § 11-47-18 "proper showing of need") |
| Whether petitioner’s remote dismissed misdemeanors could support unsuitability | Gadomski: Dismissed, remote charges cannot justify denial; disclosed candidly | Tavares: Past arrests, lack of explanatory documentation support unsuitability | Court: Remote, dismissed charges (decades old) could not properly support denial |
Key Cases Cited
- Mosby v. Devine, 851 A.2d 1031 (R.I. 2004) (local suitability determinations under § 11-47-11 are reviewable and rejected applicants are entitled to the reasoning and evidence supporting denials)
- State v. Storms, 308 A.2d 463 (R.I. 1973) (Firearms Act delegates licensing discretion to local authorities but contemplates fact-finding within statutory parameters)
- Bernuth v. Zoning Board of Review of New Shoreham, 770 A.2d 396 (R.I. 2001) (administrative findings must be factual, not conclusory; courts will not search the record to supply missing findings)